Q4 MP bot
-
- Posts: 1892
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 8:00 am
Q4 MP bot
http://quake4.filefront.com/file/Sabota8;52204#Download
and http://esreality.com/?a=post&id=955260
to get it working with tmp maps (tho info is in the readme)
and http://esreality.com/?a=post&id=955260
to get it working with tmp maps (tho info is in the readme)
-
- Posts: 1892
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 8:00 am
Talking about the bright skins?
Because the textures shouldnt contribute to your ability to see your opponent? Because blending in to the background makes for a less skilled game?
There are some areas where the little zombie or whatever it is is impossible to see at range, and without force model is just lame.
Of course there are others who would like everyone to be running around in the shadows hiding from eachother.
Because the textures shouldnt contribute to your ability to see your opponent? Because blending in to the background makes for a less skilled game?
There are some areas where the little zombie or whatever it is is impossible to see at range, and without force model is just lame.
Of course there are others who would like everyone to be running around in the shadows hiding from eachother.
-
- Posts: 4108
- Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am
Some of us view utilizing light and the environment to an advantage as a skill. No textures and brightskins doesn't necessarily make the game more skill-based it's simply a preference some have IMO.jester! wrote:
Because the textures shouldnt contribute to your ability to see your opponent? Because blending in to the background makes for a less skilled game?
-
- Posts: 4108
- Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am
I think for the most part the sub communities really decide for themselves.Foo wrote:choice is good, but in the context of the MP game it needs to be dictated at the server level whether brightskins are permitted. Allowing people to use brightskins on any server is counterproductive.
Duelers/TDM/CTF, the more competitive focused are really all going to go with bright skins. Look at the major mods in q4 at the moment and you can see the trend.
RA3 was the only one where I think some people would go against using the brightskins even though everyone had access to them.
Really the only group that isnt going to go the brightskin route is FFA imo, or some reality type mods. When I play against the Q3 bots I run a nice config, full graphics, no bright skins, no force models, shadows, AA and all that, because its fun to run around the cool looking maps and shoot at the great models. Online though shadows and hiding dont fit into how I, and going by the mod trends are shaping up, the majority of players, want to play.
put all of x-battle files in sabot folder,q4max or other mods do the same,it works fine,oh this is my answerd on SABOT forumtwism wrote:Isn't there a way to get it to run on a mod like q4max..... at least with bright skins?
those normal skins are terrible.-- I know thats an old topic... but I dont have broadband, so havn't really played the game
EDIT: never mind..... saw how to do it in the link![]()
Twis
http://www.oakbots.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?p=162#162
[url=http://www.xfire.com/xf/modules.php?name=XFire&file=profile&uname=catphone][img]http://miniprofile.xfire.com/bg/bg/type/2/catphone.png[/img][/url]
-
- Posts: 1892
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 8:00 am
ok then i guess i shouldn't be playing with a tweaked cfg at all and just suffer with my outdated computer and 20 fps. and shit, better contact the cpl, ggl, and the mappers of the fps mappacks and tell them to stop cheating too. q4max, cheaters...x-battle, cheaters...and so on...ensiform wrote:because its cheating? i see nothing wrong with normal models :x
That's not really what I was getting at.jester! wrote:I think for the most part the sub communities really decide for themselves.Foo wrote:choice is good, but in the context of the MP game it needs to be dictated at the server level whether brightskins are permitted. Allowing people to use brightskins on any server is counterproductive.
Duelers/TDM/CTF, the more competitive focused are really all going to go with bright skins. Look at the major mods in q4 at the moment and you can see the trend.
RA3 was the only one where I think some people would go against using the brightskins even though everyone had access to them.
Really the only group that isnt going to go the brightskin route is FFA imo, or some reality type mods. When I play against the Q3 bots I run a nice config, full graphics, no bright skins, no force models, shadows, AA and all that, because its fun to run around the cool looking maps and shoot at the great models. Online though shadows and hiding dont fit into how I, and going by the mod trends are shaping up, the majority of players, want to play.
My point was that if you have an online game running where brightskins are simultaneously off by default but able to be enabled by each player, then actually the notion of having a free choice on whether to use them or not is BS.
Why? Because if you put a player not using brightskins up against a player using brightskins, the latter has a definable advantage. The end result of this as we've seen with Q3 OSP is that you either use brightskins online all the time, or you get left behind.
Now the response that usually comes at this point is that there are tons of other factors which are just like this: Picmip levels, gamma settings, maxpackets... and that is true, however just because these existing - and perhaps unavoidable - imbalances are available to be taken advantage of that doesn't follow that another one should be introduced.
There are more 'correct' ways to implement brightskins in an online game/mod which ensures it's kept fair for all players regardless of their preference or level of knowledge in the game, which are one of either:
* Leave them out entirely
* Fix them in permanently
* Set them as a votable option on the server which when turned on is applied to everyone
Personally I see the last option as offering the most flexibility.
"Maybe you have some bird ideas. Maybe that’s the best you can do."
― Terry A. Davis
― Terry A. Davis